Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[CLN] Cleanup query node after pushdown #3280

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 11, 2024
Merged

[CLN] Cleanup query node after pushdown #3280

merged 2 commits into from
Dec 11, 2024

Conversation

Sicheng-Pan
Copy link
Contributor

@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan commented Dec 10, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Description of changes

Summarize the changes made by this PR.

  • Improvements & Bug fixes
    • Remove unused impls in query node after query pushdown landed
  • New functionality
    • N/A

Test plan

How are these changes tested?

  • Tests pass locally with pytest for python, yarn test for js, cargo test for rust

Documentation Changes

Are all docstrings for user-facing APIs updated if required? Do we need to make documentation changes in the docs repository?
N/A

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

Reviewer Checklist

Please leverage this checklist to ensure your code review is thorough before approving

Testing, Bugs, Errors, Logs, Documentation

  • Can you think of any use case in which the code does not behave as intended? Have they been tested?
  • Can you think of any inputs or external events that could break the code? Is user input validated and safe? Have they been tested?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate property based tests?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate unit tests?
  • Should any logging, debugging, tracing information be added or removed?
  • Are error messages user-friendly?
  • Have all documentation changes needed been made?
  • Have all non-obvious changes been commented?

System Compatibility

  • Are there any potential impacts on other parts of the system or backward compatibility?
  • Does this change intersect with any items on our roadmap, and if so, is there a plan for fitting them together?

Quality

  • Is this code of a unexpectedly high quality (Readability, Modularity, Intuitiveness)

@Sicheng-Pan Graphite App
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sicheng-Pan commented Dec 10, 2024 •
edited
Loading

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan marked this pull request as ready for review December 10, 2024 19:29
@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan mentioned this pull request Dec 10, 2024
Merged
1 task
rescrv
rescrv reviewed Dec 10, 2024
View reviewed changes
rust/worker/src/execution/operator.rs Outdated
@@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ where
#[derive(Debug)]
pub(super) struct TaskResult<Output, Error> {
result: Result<Output, TaskError<Error>>,
#[allow(dead_code)]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rather than allowing dead code and spreading the dead code, can we clean it up?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I left it here because I think this field might be useful in the future (e.g. if an orchestrator needs to trace / persist the result)

For context, it was used by the old hnsw orchestrator where it needs to track multiple concurrent flows of compute. It is not required now because the new orchestrators do not have this need.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At a closer look it is used in some unit tests so probably we should not remove this.

@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan requested a review from rescrv December 10, 2024 23:14
rescrv
rescrv approved these changes Dec 10, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rescrv rescrv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd still reap the dead code.

@Sicheng-Pan
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've reaped the dead codes that are unlikely to be used. The remaining ones are used by unit tests right now, so I'm planning to keep them for now.

@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan force-pushed the 12-10-_cln_cleanup_query_node_after_pushdown branch from e800d7e to 8147711 Compare December 11, 2024 19:33
@Sicheng-Pan Graphite App
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sicheng-Pan commented Dec 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Merge activity

  • Dec 11, 3:21 PM EST: A user started a stack merge that includes this pull request via Graphite.
  • Dec 11, 3:24 PM EST: Graphite rebased this pull request as part of a merge.
  • Dec 11, 3:25 PM EST: A user merged this pull request with Graphite.

@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan force-pushed the 12-10-_cln_cleanup_query_node_after_pushdown branch from 8147711 to ba40c1a Compare December 11, 2024 20:23
@Sicheng-Pan Sicheng-Pan merged commit 5a588a9 into main Dec 11, 2024
69 of 70 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@rescrv rescrv rescrv approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@Sicheng-Pan @rescrv